Evolution, preconception, and the McCanns

Okay, I’m going to try and do a PR job on the McCanns, but before all the boos and hisses start, I must make it clear I am not receiving even one penny of disbursement from the Find Madeleine Fund.  It is on the debate forum because much of what is debated, and how it is debated colours the way we think about events surrounding the disappearance of the little girl and all the subsequent events between then and the present day.  I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING…IT’S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS!!
 
I was sitting down the other night and watching an old re-run of CSI Miami when a thought occurred to me about preconceptions.  There was Horatio Caine adjusting his sunglasses while his team worked the crime scene with all the gizmos and next gen technology that they could possibly want.  If Horatio had been on the McCann case it would have been a two part episode at most.
 
Once I was satisfied Horatio’s sunglasses were firmly attached to the bridge of his nose my mind drifted onto a question of whether, and how, these TV series are actually conditioning my perception of what it is like in Miami; and I don’t think I could drive past a glass clad skyscraper in New York without fully expecting to have an Englishman with an impeccable accent and up to no good come crashing through a window on the 101^st floor and landing on the bonnet of my car.  I could go on, but you get the picture by now I’m sure.  Though while my preconceptions of New York and Miami may have become warped from watching American TV series and movies, there is still the reality of where I live to give me grounding in my day to day existence.  Well, you would think so wouldn’t you? 
 
I have never lived more than half a mile from where I was born and raised, so a lifetime’s experience of my personal square mile should be environmentally quite unambiguous, but sadly it isn’t.  The square mile I am talking about is a warren of terraced houses built mostly at the beginning of the last century to house itinerants, navvies and plate-layers flocking to the town to lay dockyard foundations and railways as the Welsh coal and steel industry burgeoned to it’s peak between the twenties and fifties.  That’s long gone of course, so where am I living today, and who the hell are my neighbours?  A quick stroll down the high street takes me past 2 chip shops, one pizzeria, one Indian takeaway, one Chinese, a kebab house, 3 barbers, two launderettes, a couple of blocks of social housing where working men’s clubs once stood, and enough tattoo ink on the arms and heads of the locals to provide copies of War and Peace to every library in the UK.  To sum up then, I don’t really know where I’m living anymore even after a lifetime of living here.
 
So what has all of this got to do with the McCanns: Just two words, preconception and evolution.  Just who in the hell are these people really?  Were they always the way they are now, or did what happen to them change them fundamentally from who they once were?  Let’s go back to the moment just before they agreed to take a holiday in Praia Da Luz and try to get a fix on family McCann.  Much has been talked on Forums throughout the net about Gaspar testimony and CATS files, I have done so myself on a number of occasions. I know that seeking the views of friends and acquaintances, cannot be an objective measure of who the parents are directly, but let’s leave the parents for now and concentrate on Madeleine.  A happy Madeleine is a good proxy for a happy family.
 
Amanda Coxon was a cleaning lady for the McCanns, and this is what she has to say about Madeleine:
 
“I had a good relationship with Madeleine, I would describe her as full of fun, intelligent for her age and very active. She is a very happy girl and the last time I saw her, she was already capable of maintaining a conversation. She clearly understood the instructions given to her and was a good listener.
 
I would say that Madeleine is a very healthy girl and I never noticed any changes in behaviour. I would not describe her as a hyperactive child. I do not know of any problem related to sleeping, but I was rarely present when she went to bed.
Kate and Gerry never mentioned having any type of problem with Madeleine.
She was well behaved, never caused her parents any problems and apparently always understood what she was told. The parents never looked tired of taking care of Madeleine.”
 
Hayley Plummer was a nursery school teacher, and someone one who, given daily contact with the little girl, you might expect to notice episodes of emotional trauma over the years.  This what she says:
 
“As a couple, James and I would take care of Madeleine and the twins in their house in Rothley about every two months, for a few hours each time. We would arrive at the house at about 19.00 – 19.30 when the twins were already asleep, but Madeleine was waiting for us and would be up for about half an hour. The routine followed would be to brush her teeth and tell her a story or two before going to sleep, followed by a brief passage through the twins room. Once she was alone Madeleine would generally fall asleep after 10 minutes and during my stays in their house she would never get out of bed after having fallen asleep. She would always sleep in her room. I do not remember Madeleine having been difficult when we were there.”
 
And
 
“I have known Madeleine for about three years and she was always under my responsibility at the Laurels nursery… Kate and Gerry would take turns in dropping off and fetching her from the nursery……….Madeline was a very polite and affectionate girl, particularly in respect to the twins. At the nursery she was a very popular girl and it was a pleasure to have her near……… She seemed to be a very alert girl and she always adapted well. The only time I remember her feeling a little intimidated was when she changed classroom for the first time and she was placed with more children who were a bit older…… She would show some shyness when she was left by her parents but she adapted rapidly so that they would leave after she finished her breakfast…….. Madeleine made many friends at the nursery but her best friend was Sophia. I think that Kate and Sophia’s mother (Sally) became good friends based upon the friendship between their daughters…. Madeleine never showed any problems or worry she might have had, or show any behaviour that would cause any worry. I do not consider Madeleine to be hyperactive, she was a healthy girl with normal development for her age……. For me Madeleine is calm and easy to get on with.”
 
Finally, another Nursery teacher, Sharon Lewin
 
“I never saw Madeleine have any problem or conflict with her parents, family members or friends……. Madeleine felt comfortable at the nursery school; she had many friends and got on well with the other children…… Madeleine was quite a healthy girl. She had a good appetite and ate well. I don't remember any injury or accident. She would occasionally have a small scrape at the nursery but nothing abnormal. During the six months she was under my care she was absent five times because of being unwell, but they were just small colds with a high temperature…… Madeleine was a very active child but I would not call her hyperactive. She never got over excited and always had good behaviour. Madeleine was easy to look after, a very independent girl but she never placed herself in dangerous situations, as far as I saw….. Occasionally during the afternoon, some of the children would have a siesta in the dormitory but Madeleine never did. I had the opportunity to be present at her bedtime when I looked after her. Bath time was at about 18.30 - 19.00 and she would later go to bed at about 19.30 – 20.00 I would read her a story or two and she would always fall asleep half way through.”
 
Not exactly a child on the edge then. 
 
If the parents were going through an emotional and financial upheaval they were certainly good enough parents to shield it from the children. So what on earth could have happened between 29^th April and 3^rd May 2007?  It was something so awful that the parents would never be the same again.  Let’s take the popular scenario that the child died accidentally by their hand.  Put yourself in their shoes. That you are to blame only amplifies the grief, and while your world has fallen apart your first thoughts are the twins.  As parents, the last thing you would think is “We’ve killed our eldest daughter; we don’t deserve to be parents to our twins, so let’s just own up and allow them to be taken into care while we go to prison.”  What binds you to the remaining children is a bond so strong you would do anything to hold on to it, even lie; say anything.  No amount of prison time is ever going to be worse than what you will have to live with for the rest of your life.
 
In another post I brought up the topic of the media blitz and the entire bizarre goings on, but was it the fault of the McCanns it should have happened?  Again, put yourself in their shoes.  Would you be making calls home in such circumstances while being torn apart by grief; what words would be coming out of your mouth; would you be making any sense at all?  Is it your fault you are surrounded by ‘friends who have friends’ and who in the heat of the moment, group panic and in the absence of common sense, start thrashing their mobile phone buttons?  What would you do once Pandora’s Box had been flung open and you find yourself blinded by flash photography; swallowing countless microphones, tripping over news media cabling and being torn from pillar to post by friends, advisors, police, and holiday gawpers?  The answer is to turn into a gibbering wreck.
 
Whatever one might believe concerning their subsequent actions the only thing that can be objectively concluded is that they did it all wrong.  Take cynicism and suspicion born of hindsight out of the equation, that’s all you are left with.
 
 
 

Kepharel,
quote"
Again, put yourself in their shoes. Would you be making calls home in such circumstances while being torn apart by grief; what words would be coming out of your mouth; would you be making any sense at all? "
unquote

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the oddest thing they started with was calling family and friends when she went "missing", INCLUDING elderly parents, who must have been shocked around midnight, whilst a "missing" girl still could have been FOUND. I also gave the example, when my first husband died after midnight: I did NOT phone my family or anyone else, let alone my parents. I waited until it was light, then phoned my youngest brother asking him to go to my parents to tell them in person and console them.

Something was wrong with this sad saga from the word "go".

So, in your scenario, The McCanns' would have felt obliged to cover up an accident which left their eldest daughter dead. Not for their own sakes but for those of their remaining children.

How did Madeleine die though, did one of them hit her causing her to fall and hurt herself; if so why would the other one cover it up? I wouldn't cover up such a situation if my husband had caused the death of my child and he wouldn't cover up for me.

So, if Madeleine had woken up when they were both out and fallen, say from the back of the sofa, hit her head and died they would both be equally guilty for allowing Madeleine to endanger herself. Ok.
I would imagine they would panic, each maybe blaming the other and worry about the twins - or in Kate's case what her parents would say!!

What I wouldn't imagine they would do would be to hide the body of their daughter, enact an abduction and phone all of their relatives - including Kate's sick father- and friends in the middle of the night.
I wouldn't imagine they would lie to these relatives and friends about the state of the apartment , jemmied shutters, open windows, doors ajar or not so much ajar or further ajar etc.
Of course their friends would pull out all the stops and try to help, the McCanns knew this of course which is why they cried wolf.

In that scenario, why didn't they just phone a hospital and say the child had fallen and died, they'd tried their best to resucitate her - both being doctors, but to no avail?
I bet they would have been met with kindness and sympathy.

No need for "abduction", police - a tragic accident- they could have said it happened when they were both there checking - their friends would have backed them up, come on it could happen to the best of us; those of us who leave their kids on the own of course- which they all admitted to.

But they chose the abduction route, the police route, the "what will my parents say" arguido route.
The big question has always been, why?

Whatever these two parents did or didn't do, it was not in order to keep their remaining 2 children out of care.That simply would not have happened.The authorities would have worked with the wider family in order to ensure the needs of the twins remained paramount.They would have been placed with family members.

It seems to me that the parents did everything to protect their own image , their own reputations, their own jobs.That was their paramount concern.

And it still is.

Hi Chatelaine, and Casey,
 
I take your points about the actual scenario I proposed.  The scenario I devised though, was a ‘popular’ theory to support the thrust of my argument that the McCanns were not people in control of a situation, but being driven by it.  Any scenario that had the McCanns responsible for the accidental death of their only child would have done for my purposes, but the post is trying to get behind that and put the reader in their shoes, so to speak.
 
Of course, a scenario that had the parent’s pre-planning say, “an abduction gone wrong”; another popular theory, would blow my ‘they are only human’ PR job out of the water.  But as the Dusty Springfield song goes 'nothing can be proved'
 
Chatelaine, grief and how you cope in the immediate aftermath is a very personal thing.  For my part, on the death of both my grandmother and mother I felt the need to speak to family for support straight away.  There is no right and wrong to it.  I guess my own personal experience and my nature lead me to sympathise somewhat with the way the McCanns were apparently dealing with the situation, up to a point.  Like I said ‘put yourself in their shoes’, and that is what I did for myself when trying to emphasise their humanity.
 
Casey, you have a valid point, and blaming each other is entirely possible, and in the particular circumstances that you outline viz.”she fell” may have produced a solution such as you outline involving hospitals etc.  It still, however, leaves them with a charge of neglect and child abandonment.  The state of the apartment, and whether it was orchestrated or not is another matter which I'm looking at now.
 
But to get back to my PR job, something happened that transformed a happy normal family and the personalities of the parents; something very, very bad and what it was is the conjecture, debate, and argument that drives this forum. They were good people before they went on holiday, and good people don’t turn bad overnight. My argument for this thread is, therefore, they were victims of their own making who staggered from one disaster to another as they tried to cope with the self inflicted horror and the rapidly ever changing circumstances that resulted.  Who you see before you today after years of lies and litigation is a travesty of who they once were.
 

I knew this was gonna be a toughie  but I do like a challenge

If you like a challenge Kepharel here's a simple one which I'm surprised you haven't tackled already.

As you have stated that you are an accountant it would be extremely inciteful and possibly valuable to have your analysis of the Fund (Limited Company) accounts.

Hi Aquila,

I've certainly taken a look at the analysis done by Enid O'Dowd, a chartered accountant http://www.mccannfiles.com/id429.html which is certainly better than anything I could produce.  I'm often accused of bringing up topics on here that have been done to death, so find myself in the happy position of redirecting other peeps for a change. 

Kepharel wrote:Hi Aquila,

I've certainly taken a look at the analysis done by Enid O'Dowd, a chartered accountant http://www.mccannfiles.com/id429.html which is certainly better than anything I could produce.  I'm often accused of bringing up topics on here that have been done to death, so find myself in the happy position of redirecting other peeps for a change. 

Oh Kepharel, there was I hoping for a second opinion on the accounts from an accountant and....well nothing.

What a disappointment. Something of substance would be fantastic.

Never mind, your PR exercise is going well....and apparently it's not your profession.

aquila wrote:If you like a challenge Kepharel here's a simple one which I'm surprised you haven't tackled already.

As you have stated that you are an accountant it would be extremely inciteful and possibly valuable to have your analysis of the Fund (Limited Company) accounts.

Nice one aquila, I've suspected that Kapheral has been a wind-up merchant and a McCann sympathiser for some time, I look forward to reading his/her analysis of the McCann (Limited company bank account to fund the Mcann family but not actually spent on looking for Madeleine) Fund.

I can't wait for his/her analysis.  

Hya Aquila, Hya New,

If there is anything in the O'Dowd analysis you don't understand and would like explained further I shall do my best, just be specific in the question and I'll oblige if I can. I'm not a McCann sympathiser just an instigator for and stimulator of debate, and I'll not stop being a devils advocate because some peeps on here are offended by it.  It wasn't long ago I was being hammered for my obnoxious thread which painted the McCanns in a very different light.  Anyone comparing that thread with this one will see I have no inclination to any particular side in an argument. 

I have got a lot from debates on this site, including a better understanding of the DNA part of the Scenario thread.  Unfortunately I have yet to be enthused by much that you have to say, your posts on this thread being a good example of the level of your contributions.

Kepharel wrote:Hya Aquila, Hya New,

If there is anything in the O'Dowd analysis you don't understand and would like explained further I shall do my best, just be specific in the question and I'll oblige if I can. I'm not a McCann sympathiser just an instigator for and stimulator of debate, and I'll not stop being a devils advocate because some peeps on here are offended by it.  It wasn't long ago I was being hammered for my obnoxious thread which painted the McCanns in a very different light.  Anyone comparing that thread with this one will see I have no inclination to any particular side in an argument. 

I have got a lot from debates on this site, including a better understanding of the DNA part of the Scenario thread.  Unfortunately I have yet to be enthused by much that you have to say, your post on this thread being a good example of the level of your contributions.

The forum is not about you Kepharel. It's about Madeleine McCann.

You are turning it into the Kepharel show...something to amuse you perhaps....to stimulate your debating skills....to play devil's advocate...to massage your ego...to exhibit some sort of power to influence...

It's not about you but it's all about you really isn't it.

Remember Madeleine McCann? She's the little three year old girl that was so badly let down by everyone around her - and continues to be let down by you and your comments.

It would be interesting to hear from another accountant if he or she agrees with the criticisms which Ms O'Dowd's report has raised about the fund.

As a complete non-professional person, I can only assume that what she has said is valid.

It's interesting also that, as far as I know, there hasn't been the usual torrent of abuse from McCann supporters whenever something critical of the McCanns is published.

Kepharel wrote:Hya Aquila, Hya New,

If there is anything in the O'Dowd analysis you don't understand and would like explained further I shall do my best, just be specific in the question and I'll oblige if I can. I'm not a McCann sympathiser just an instigator for and stimulator of debate, and I'll not stop being a devils advocate because some peeps on here are offended by it.  It wasn't long ago I was being hammered for my obnoxious thread which painted the McCanns in a very different light.  Anyone comparing that thread with this one will see I have no inclination to any particular side in an argument. 

I have got a lot from debates on this site, including a better understanding of the DNA part of the Scenario thread.  Unfortunately I have yet to be enthused by much that you have to say, your posts on this thread being a good example of the level of your contributions.

Oh dear, have I hit a nerve. I've been following this farce since 3rd May 2007, it has taken up hours and hours of my life hoping that one day Madeleine will get the justice she deserves so I don't need clever dicks like yourself who come homing in after 6 years telling us on this forum what we should or shouldn't think. I have posted off and on for some years but only post when I think I have something to contribute. I am not as eloquent as some people on this forum so leave it to the people who know more than I do. You seem to keep ramming down everyones throats about DNA, etc etc, where have you been for the past 6 years?

Perhaps some people missed it but Kepharel did write in capital letters :-

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING.  IT`S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS.

Its good for the forum to consider all perspectives or else we`ll get a reputation of being a lynch mob.

Woofer wrote:Perhaps some people missed it but Kepharel did write in capital letters :-

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING.  IT`S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS.

Its good for the forum to consider all perspectives or else we`ll get a reputation of being a lynch mob.

 Why does your response not surprise Woofer?

Kepharel wrote:  What would you do once Pandora’s Box had been flung open and you find yourself blinded by flash photography; swallowing countless microphones, tripping over news media cabling and being torn from pillar to post by friends, advisors, police, and holiday gawpers?  The answer is to turn into a gibbering wreck.
 
Whatever one might believe concerning their subsequent actions the only thing that can be objectively concluded is that they did it all wrong.  Take cynicism and suspicion born of hindsight out of the equation, that’s all you are left with.
 
 
 

 Do you think they were 'gibbering wrecks' Kepharel? They were given a PR machine.   They were asked how they coped with the emotional highs and lows in this interview. From 15 seconds onwards.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Perhaps some people missed it but Kepharel did write in capital letters :-

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING.  IT`S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS.

Its good for the forum to consider all perspectives or else we`ll get a reputation of being a lynch mob.

 Why does your response not surprise Woofer?

 Ah well at least I`m becoming known for it (with pride I might add)

Woofer wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Perhaps some people missed it but Kepharel did write in capital letters :-

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING.  IT`S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS.

Its good for the forum to consider all perspectives or else we`ll get a reputation of being a lynch mob.

 Why does your response not surprise Woofer?

 Ah well at least I`m becoming known for it (with pride I might add)

Pride comes before a fall so I'm told.

worriedmum wrote:

Kepharel wrote:  What would you do once Pandora’s Box had been flung open and you find yourself blinded by flash photography; swallowing countless microphones, tripping over news media cabling and being torn from pillar to post by friends, advisors, police, and holiday gawpers?  The answer is to turn into a gibbering wreck.
 
Whatever one might believe concerning their subsequent actions the only thing that can be objectively concluded is that they did it all wrong.  Take cynicism and suspicion born of hindsight out of the equation, that’s all you are left with.
 
 
 

 Do you think they were 'gibbering wrecks' Kepharel? They were given a PR machine.   They were asked how they coped with the emotional highs and lows in this interview. From 15 seconds onwards.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There is absolutely nothing normal about these parents. This video just demonstrates it.

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Perhaps some people missed it but Kepharel did write in capital letters :-

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING.  IT`S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS.

Its good for the forum to consider all perspectives or else we`ll get a reputation of being a lynch mob.

 Why does your response not surprise Woofer?

 Ah well at least I`m becoming known for it (with pride I might add)

Pride comes before a fall so I'm told.

 Well I don`t mind falling.

One of the things I`m pleased Kepharel brought up is that of putting oneself in the position of having killed one`s child, perhaps in a fit of temper or through neglect.  What would you do?  I have tried to do this at times but the scenario is so awful I don`t get very far.

Woofer wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Perhaps some people missed it but Kepharel did write in capital letters :-

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEWS I AM PRESENTING.  IT`S JUST AN EXERCISE FOLKS.

Its good for the forum to consider all perspectives or else we`ll get a reputation of being a lynch mob.

 Why does your response not surprise Woofer?

 Ah well at least I`m becoming known for it (with pride I might add)

Pride comes before a fall so I'm told.

 Well I don`t mind falling.

One of the things I`m pleased Kepharel brought up is that of putting oneself in the position of having killed one`s child, perhaps in a fit of temper or through neglect.  What would you do?  I have tried to do this at times but the scenario is so awful I don`t get very far.

I'll be really pleased when Kepharel (don't fret, don't gasp, don't hold your breath because it won't happen) gives his professional opinion on the Fund (Limited Company). Now that would be a meaningful and worthy contribution.

Yes, we`re in agreement there

Woofer, I am sure that most parents if they're honest will admit that there have been terrible times when they could have harmed their children.

I have every sympathy for someone who finds themselves in such a situation but, if they then go through a charade of pretending that the child had been abducted - I'm not talking only of the McCanns, it's a fairly common claim - that's where the sympathy ends.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Woofer, I am sure that most parents if they're honest will admit that there have been terrible times when they could have harmed their children.

I have every sympathy for someone who finds themselves in such a situation but, if they then go through a charade of pretending that the child had been abducted - I'm not talking only of the McCanns, it's a fairly common claim - that's where the sympathy ends.

 Yes, agree totally.

Has the cat got Kepharel's tongue? will we have another topic opened on how to debate on a forum? will the poor uneducated amongst us be enlightened? will we learn how to never answer a straight question with a straight answer? Is Kepharel preparing another long winded, ambiguous post? Will there be another exciting and stimulating thread tomorrow?

Tune in folks, same time, same channel. It's the Kepharel show.

God bless Madeleine McCann. God bless this forum and hopefully soon the forum will get back down to the business of finding some justice for Madeleine.